Lux Flyer

Most people's perception of time goes out the window when put under a stressful/emergency situation. Frequently hear from emergency services workers being accused of taking 10+ minutes to get to a cardiac arrest call and then you check the report and vehicle GPS data to see it took 3 minutes. It's definitely possible the timeline is being misreported, but perhaps the flight data recorder could clarify that? Alternatively debris could have punctured the window, making a small enough compromise to shift cabin pressure enough for mask deployment. As an increased outward pressure then focused on the compromised point, it could over the next few seconds build up forces on the window, causing full failure of the window, leading it to blow out and now making a big enough hole for a rapid decompression event.

I don't think the pilots wear the same oxygen masks that are being deployed in the main cabin

Zmapper

Could this be due to WN flying out of smaller secondary airports? In Chicago, for example, ORD would presumably have more airspace and MDW has to work around what is needed for the heavy and jumbo jets that need more space to safely operate to ORD. (This is only a logical thought of mine, not a certain fact.)

LegalTender

In opposing the proposed FAA directive, Southwest said that it could no longer track the individual turbine blades on CFM56 engines. It somehow had interspersed them across the fleet. The airline said it would need more than 18 months to complete ultrasound inspections because of the tracking irregularity.

Now, after 1380, Southwest pledges to complete all ultrasound inspections in 30 days. They can do that without disrupting routes and schedules? How??

The turbine blades, per former FAA inspector general Mary Schiavio, are not interchangeable. They must be replaced by the manufacturer number. There are cooling chambers within the turbine blades. It's not just a hunk of titanium.

https://milesobrien.com/aviation-and...-been-avoided/

EmailKid

I was under the impression that it is all combined airspace for the greater metropolitan area such as EWR, JFK and LGA. Even BWI would be impacted by WAS airports, or did I not understand this correctly?

steved5480

You are correct.

kennycrudup

(... not to mention "skin", "tin", "ticket".)

DenverBrian

Much more a factor of airport and runway than airline. Everything out of DEN is smooth and easy on takeoff because the plane is taking off on a runway of 10,000 feet or more and there is nothing but wheat and cows for miles around the runways.

In airports like MDW, LGA, BUR, SNA, and so on, you have much shorter runways, with tall buildings much closer and much more density. So takeoffs are faster, with more urgency to get up in the air and clear everything.

Think about which airports you fly out of and see if this isn't actually what you're perceiving as airline-specific.

OPNLguy

From looking at the NTSB video I linked earlier, these admittedly non-NTSB eyes are not completely convinced at this point that the errant blade hit the window, per se. The window that's missing is significantly aft along the fuselage from the blade's normal rotational plane of the fan disk, and even with the air loads associated with, say, 300 kts of aircraft speed, could it still strike the window? Or did the departing blade commence the disintegration of the engine cowling, with a larger chunk of cowling hitting the window? If the comments regarding about a 10 second lag between the decompression and the big boom are correct, was the window only cracked (at first) from debris impact perhaps initiating s "slow" decompression event (for all of about 10 seconds) before the window failed completely, with the passenger partially going out of the aircraft?

NTSB will find the actual answers, but it will take some time...

joshua362

Every airplane has 2 demonstrated airspeeds that produce the best rate of climb (Vy) and best angle of climb (Vx).

Vy is generally always used to gain the most altitude in the shortest time with the thought being to get as high as quickly possible in case of an emergency such as losing an engine, you have more time and altitude to deal with it before returning to earth.

Take off is alway at full engine power.

DEN is an anomaly due to its mile high altitude hence the longer runways & takeoff rolls and reduced climbing performance but the airspeeds are the same. Wheat & cows have little to do it except maybe to provide greater cushions for traffic separation rather than having to worry about buildings and other obstacles.

In other words, its just your perception.

ursine1

Money. The reason is money.

sbrower

Within the technicality of using the actual word "emergency" your citations appear to be correct. However, it should be noted that US 1549 declared "Mayday" and J7 592 also said "Mayday" (although, if I understand the transcript, in the stress of the situation they may not have pressed the "transmit" button when they declared "Mayday"). As described in another message, above, declaring "Mayday" is a "declaration of emergency" by the flight crew. AS 261 is an odd one (reading the transcript is very stressful) because they spent more time arguing with their company representatives than they did talking to ATC.

So, by my count, we have 1 example of not "declaring emergency", plus the recent Southwest incident. But that is before we have the CVR transcript - maybe we will learn that Southwest did declare an emergency (and it just wasn't captured on the recording linked above) or perhaps we will learn that they made the same mistake as J7 592, and said the word "Mayday" or "Emergency" but forgot to push the button to transmit - or maybe, under the stress of the moment, they did a great job of handling the flight but, due to stress, omitted a formal declaration of emergency. (The transcript of US 1549 reminded me that the emergency checklist might have included an instruction to declare emergency).

sdsearch

But what effect they have on a passenger can vary with the plane type. And of course, this can all only be compared at the same airport with airplanes using the same runway.

So, kylelenk, were you comparing 737s on DL or UA (or other plane types), and were comparing WN ascents at the same airport as the DL or UA ascents?

What I've felt is that things like ascent feel different on a 320 vs a 757 vs a 737, but WN only flies that latter, while I'm very likely to be on one of the former on one of the legacies domestically (AA/DL/UA), if I'm not on an E175 which is yet another ball of wax.

DenverBrian

I'll buy most of that. It still doesn't take into account runway length and the situations where a plane will go to full throttle while standing on the brakes before commencing the takeoff roll, vs. the more normal moving to full throttle and having the plane lumber from 0-60 in several seconds.

Ditka

Takeoff is rarely at full power and climbout is always at or above V2 (engine out speed) until you start cleaning up the flaps.
the majority of times your takeoff is done at a reduced power setting in order to preserve engine life (aka cost) and reduce the possibility of a catastrophic engine failure (engines are more likely to fail catastrophically at full power)
There are certain circumstances where MAX power is used for takeoff...gusty winds/ wind shear conditions; if anti ice is applied etc, or if the takeoff performance will not allow you to accomplish a reduced takeoff setting (i.e. short runway, heavy plane etc)

A plane flying from Midway to STL might be able to accomplish a reduced takeoff, but a plane flying from Midway to LAX may have to do a max takeoff due to heavier fuel loads and/or cargo.

Edit: your speeds are not always the same: they are weight dependent.

lmwong1977

NYT: DFW NBC: AJC: Reuters: